Few places in Washington can offer a view of the Washington Monument, the Potomac, and the Jefferson Memorial from a fairway. One of them is East Potomac Golf Links, a public course on a peninsula known as Hains Point. Naturally, it has been a fixture of the capital for over a century. However, since late 2025, it has been at the center of a legal and political debate over who gets to reshape it and how quickly. That debate has now reached its sharpest point, with hundreds of trees cut down and a federal judge demanding answers from President Trump’s administration.

On Monday, October 12, WTOP reporter Neil Augenstein tweeted about the federal judge’s order.

“Breaking: federal judge orders superintendent of National Park Service to testify under oath at 10 a.m. this morning about removal of more than 500 trees Saturday at East Potomac Park.”

For background, the federal judge is U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, who has overseen the case since February, and the official in question is Kevin Griess, superintendent of National Mall and Memorial Parks.

Given the situation, the judge has demanded answers. She wants to know who ordered the removal, when the superintendent received the order, how and when preparations began, and whether government lawyers were aware of the plan.

She sharply criticized the government for cutting trees, that too at short notice. “More than just being upset and furious right now, I am just beyond disappointed with the government.”

She got even more furious when the DOJ attorney said they had tried their “best” to bring the action notice to her. Clearly unimpressed, she raised her voice before adding, “You did not do your best. You did ⁠your absolute worst.”

For now, she has barred all tree removal until 7 a.m. Tuesday, October 13, or until she issues another ruling. Even routine maintenance on the course is not exempt. Her written order noted that the removal is permanent, while a short delay would cost the government little.

Why is the course in court?

At Monday’s hearing, the government said about 430 trees had been cut down, with more than 200 still scheduled for removal. However, the plaintiffs have presented a different picture. They say around 529 targeted trees had been cut down by Saturday.

The dispute over the tree removal dates back to October 9, when the Park Service told the court it planned to remove 169 trees starting Saturday, October 10. The plan also called for another 90 trees to be removed later, with the total number potentially reaching 529.

Explaining the large-scale removal, Superintendent Griess said the trees do not contribute to the historic landscape and that the work would begin in an overgrown area called “Trash Island.”

He also stated that the trees would be removed whether or not Trump builds his new course, explaining that a temporary workforce of 20 to 50 trained personnel had become available.

“In total, the N.P.S. estimates that up to 529 trees that do not contribute to the historic landscape will be removed as part of this tree management and cultural landscape rehabilitation project. No healthy trees that are contributing features of the historical golf course (such as healthy, historic cherry trees) will be removed as part of this project,” Griess wrote, according to The New York Times.

Why does Trump want a redesign?

The roots of the dispute go back to 2020, when the Park Service signed a 50-year lease with a nonprofit, National Links Trust, to run East Potomac and two other D.C. public courses: Langston and Rock Creek.

In December 2025, the administration moved to terminate the lease, with officials saying that NLT had missed renovation deadlines. By then, debris from the demolition of the White House East Wing had reportedly started being dumped on the course.

Golf Digest reported that architect Tom Fazio, who has designed courses for Trump, toured East Potomac under an alias in late 2025. During this period, sources said Trump wanted a venue capable of hosting a major championship or the Ryder Cup, with multiple reports suggesting a possible new name: “Washington National Golf Course.”

Donald Trump does not own the courses; the federal government does. However, on May 8, the administration and NLT reached a settlement under which NLT would continue operating all three courses. The Park Service took over East Potomac’s renovation, with Fazio as the designer and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum overseeing the project.

Opposition

The plans have faced repeated opposition. In February, the D.C. Preservation League and two local golfers sued Donald Trump, arguing that the plan conflicted with the 1897 Act, which set aside the park for “the recreation and pleasure of people.”

They also argued that a tournament-level course would be more expensive to maintain and too difficult for recreational players. In addition, they cited roughly 30,000 cubic yards of fill from the East Wing demolition, which they said could contain lead or asbestos.

Judge Reyes has overseen the case since February but did not initially block the project outright. On May 4, she declined to issue a restraining order requiring advance notice before the government closed the course or cut down more than 10 trees.

She had previously warned of serious consequences if she was blindsided when work began. That warning has become particularly relevant following the latest tree removal.

The cutting has become a flashpoint in the dispute. The plaintiffs say Saturday’s work came as a surprise, despite the judge’s earlier warnings.

Beyond the legal challenge, 47 House Democrats wrote to Burgum and the Park Service objecting to the prospect of a single championship course with more expensive tee times.

The course also has historical significance: it remained segregated until 1955 and was part of the fight to desegregate golf in Washington, D.C. Supporters of the plan, on the other hand, say it will bring investment, prestige, and affordable championship-level golf.

What’s next?

Griess’s testimony and any ruling beyond the 7 a.m. Tuesday deadline will determine whether tree cutting can resume. Reyes has also expressed skepticism about whether the lawsuit, as currently written, can succeed. The Park Service has not publicly identified who ordered Saturday’s tree removal.